Early American Indians

[marduk]

Err, how do you know. Are you claiming to know all of prehistory?

in this case I clearly know far more than you or you wouldnt have asked that question
http://www.livescience.com/history/ap_0 ... habet.html

PITTSBURGH (AP) -- Two lines of an alphabet have been found inscribed in a stone in Israel, offering what some scholars say is the most solid evidence yet that the ancient Israelites were literate as early as the 10th century B.C

Charlie
what you're claiming is that because there is no evidence that both stories dont have a common source then they must both have a common source
the source for the Akkadian Gilgamesh Epics flood story sections are very well known
it is Sumerian
It isn't worded like that at all
Its called "the flood story"
it predates the Akkadian version by about 800 years
this means it predates the Biblical version by about 2500 years

you couldn't draw a comparison textually between the sumerian flood version and the biblical version because although the texts tell the same story they don't word it the same
this means of course that there is no unknown earlier story for the akkadian version to have come from
which means that the akkadian epic of gilgamesh is the first time it was worded like that because it predates the bible by at least 1600 years

the Hebrew version was written around 650bce when the people writing it were living in the same place that the Gilgamesh version was told as a part of religious ritual
something they as slaves would have been forced to attend

further to that the fact that all the other stories in the old testament with one exception are actually set in mesopotamia should point you to only one conclusion
unless of course you have faith which as we all know means you won't look at any evidence that doesnt support your personal belief

and once again the bible is the word of god if you are a believer
which means that anything else is divine mimicry
so time to ante up
you either believe that the Biblical version is the last in a long line of stories told for millenia or you believe that God made the earth in seven days around 4004bce


and you know I was asked this before
by Arch
I'm still waiting for the proof that he claimed he knew of that proves there was a version of the flood story of Noah that predates the bible

so
balls in your court
prove there was an earlier version of Noah along a hebrew source
because otherwise you are claiming that an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
which in this case
it clearly is

[Charlie Hatchett]

Because we know oral tradition existed before writing.

These stories obviously didn't start to exist with written tradition...look at all the parallels, worldwide, that predate evidence of writing. Make sure to look closely at the geological evidence that backs up the traditions.

I see your religous bias kicking in...fall into the trap, my man. I'll smoke you

You don't realize it, but your a very religous man.

In the beginning were lemurs...

Night, night..this old man's tired. Catch you manana...

[Forum Monk]

There is no manuscript proof to support the idea that the Gilgamesh Epic and Genesis account came from a common earlier source. You know that and so you pin your entire argument on it. In fact if it is stated there is an oral tradition, that by definition means it is not written.

There is strong circumstancial evidence based on the fact the flood story does not exist only in two versions from two cultures. It is world-wide from China to ancient americas to africa. Now surely you are not suggesting all these cultures were exposed to the Sumerian account. The only reasonable explanation is, either some group went around the world in the predawn years of history and recited the story, or this a common oral tradition from one or more witnesses to the same event.

[marduk]

These stories obviously didn't start to exist with written tradition...look at all the parallels, worldwide, that predate evidence of writing. Make sure to look closely at the geological evidence that backs up the traditions.

so youre claiming now that the Hebrew story and the Akkadian one that predates it by millenia are the result of a similar oral tradition which kept the events and the wording exactly the same over millenia
clutching at straws Charlie you really are

and as I already pointed out
the Gilgamesh story has a known precursor
and the Hebrew one isn't worded the same
so there goes your relaigious belief down the crapper eh

[clubs_stink]

There is no manuscript proof to support the idea that the Gilgamesh Epic and Genesis account came from a common earlier source. You know that and so you pin your entire argument on it. In fact if it is stated there is an oral tradition, that by definition means it is not written.

There is strong circumstancial evidence based on the fact the flood story does not exist only in two versions from two cultures. It is world-wide from China to ancient americas to africa. Now surely you are not suggesting all these cultures were exposed to the Sumerian account. The only reasonable explanation is, either some group went around the world in the predawn years of history and recited the story, or this a common oral tradition from one or more witnesses to the same event.

Which in effect totally nullifies the veracity of the story. In the Hebrew version, the one worshiped in XIAN churches, there is only one survivor who saved all animals and the human race. If the epic exists in other cultures and does NOT have a common source, then wherein lies the truthfulness of Noah's story?

IF the common source is only Noah and his family then, based on what we know of genetics Noah's got a lot of explaining to do...such as all racial diversity springing from the loins of he and his sons alone?

[marduk]

none of the earlier stories claim the flood was global
none of the earlier stories claim that the flood hero was the only survivor
none of the earlier stories claim that the flood survivor was a hebrew
and most importantly
none of the earlier stories are told from a monotheistic standpoint

[Forum Monk]

Which in effect totally nullifies the veracity of the story. In the Hebrew version, the one worshiped in XIAN churches, there is only one survivor who saved all animals and the human race. If the epic exists in other cultures and does NOT have a common source, then wherein lies the truthfulness of Noah's story?

IF the common source is only Noah and his family then, based on what we know of genetics Noah's got a lot of explaining to do...such as all racial diversity springing from the loins of he and his sons alone?

Please reread my statement - I never mentioned Noah.

[Forum Monk]

none of the earlier stories claim the flood was global
none of the earlier stories claim that the flood hero was the only survivor
none of the earlier stories claim that the flood survivor was a hebrew
and most importantly
none of the earlier stories are told from a monotheistic standpoint

What you say is true in most cases. Every verison was a little different. Doesn't mitigate against the early tradition theory.

[marduk]

http://www.sonymusic.com/clips/selectio ... _01_30.wav

well in the case of the epic of gilgamesh it does
its lots of earlier stories woven together into an epic
most of the sources are known
in the case of the thread of the flood story it is known
as I have already explained
I can give you a line by line comparison if you want but it will run to several pages
and like
who'd read it anyway
you're either a true believer or you got enough sense to figure out the truth of the veracity of a book that claims to be the word of an omniprescent omnicogniscent god that is full of errors anyway

[Minimalist]

And their ancestors didn't precede them?

They claim that 'god' told them to kill their ancestors. Convenient.

[Forum Monk]

well in the case of the epic of gilgamesh it does
its lots of earlier stories woven together into an epic
most of the sources are known
in the case of the thread of the flood story it is known
as I have already explained
I can give you a line by line comparison if you want but it will run to several pages
and like
who'd read it anyway
you're either a true believer or you got enough sense to figure out the truth of the veracity of a book that claims to be the word of an omniprescent omnicogniscent god that is full of errors anyway

You're right no one would read it because you've done the line by line several times. Its not necessary.

Nowhere in my posts have I mentioned Noah, God or made any reference that one story is more truthful than any other, or one is the word of God or promoted one over the others. There is no need to defend your position against something I have not said.

You keep trying to compare two cultures in support of a case which is bigger than that. I say the circumstantial evidence is strong and can not be ignored. We can leave religion out of the discussion since it is you who keeps weaving it back in.

[marduk]

Nowhere in my posts have I mentioned Noah, God or made any reference that one story is more truthful than any other, or one is the word of God or promoted one over the others. There is no need to defend your position against something I have not said.

I was defedning my position against something Charlie said
your all mememememe arent ya Monk

[Forum Monk]

I was defedning my position against something Charlie said
your all mememememe arent ya Monk

You're right and I forgot to raise my hand.
I'll go stand in the corner.

[Cognito]

You're right and I forgot to raise my hand.
I'll go stand in the corner.

Nah ... we should give you a good rap on the knuckles with a ruler and keep you inside during recess. Any whining and we'll deal with that also!

[Charlie Hatchett]

You're right and I forgot to raise my hand.
I'll go stand in the corner.

Nah ... we should give you a good rap on the knuckles with a ruler and keep you inside during recess. Any whining and we'll deal with that also!

You guys crack me up.

Now bow down and worship Marduk, the reincarnated Babylonian.

My statement:

And, before written word? The story doesn't start when writing started, according to the authors of the many flood stories. Remember the oral tradition of a great flood among Native Americans?

Putting it briefly, Gilgamesh and Noah may have had a common source. Watch your correlations...they're not necessarily causal.

Monk's statement:

You keep trying to compare two cultures in support of a case which is bigger than that. I say the circumstantial evidence is strong and can not be ignored. We can leave religion out of the discussion since it is you who keeps weaving it back in.

The "all mighty" Marduk:

I was defedning my position against something Charlie said